On Thu, Dec 17, 2009 at 9:25 PM, Robert Bradshaw <[email protected]> wrote: > On Dec 17, 2009, at 4:08 PM, Lisandro Dalcín wrote: > >>>> Good point, please push. Are there any other compilers that we >>>> should >>>> single out? We heavily use the assumption that inlined functions >>>> actually get inlined for optimization purposes. >>>> >>> >>> Intel? PathScale? PGI? Borland? (Open) Watcom? >>> >>> I can do it for Intel and PathScale ... > > Never heard of PathScale, but if you think there's a good chance of > people compiling Cython code with it than it shouldn't hurt. >
Well, I build mpi4py on SiCortex machines (MIPS arch) with PathScale :-) > Also, > inline is part of the C99 standard, maybe we could check for that > generically too. > Of course. >> >> BTW, we should protect all these definitions of INLINE inside an outer >> #ifndef INLINE ... #endif. That way, in the face of a compiler Cython >> is not aware of, we can pass -DINLINE=something and make it work. What >> do you think? > > Yes, we should. > This is a preliminary fix: http://hg.cython.org/cython-devel/rev/9918bc676467 -- Lisandro Dalcín --------------- Centro Internacional de Métodos Computacionales en Ingeniería (CIMEC) Instituto de Desarrollo Tecnológico para la Industria Química (INTEC) Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET) PTLC - Güemes 3450, (3000) Santa Fe, Argentina Tel/Fax: +54-(0)342-451.1594 _______________________________________________ Cython-dev mailing list [email protected] http://codespeak.net/mailman/listinfo/cython-dev
